Graffiti

I was gratified to read an article about another Los Angeles resident, Francisco Rivera, who has taken it upon himself to clean up graffiti in his neighborhood (Nov. 13). It helped dispel several myths: First, that people doing this work are out fulfilling some community service obligation (my husband and I, who worked to clean traffic signs in Mount Washington and Montecito Heights, were often asked the same question). Second, that cleaning up graffiti is a risky undertaking that will draw attacks from taggers. We never once had anyone threaten us while cleaning signs.

There is a third myth that I would like to see dispelled: that it doesn’t do any good; things that have been tagged will simply be retagged. Most of the signs we cleaned in our area are still graffiti-free, nearly two years later.

JERI SANTANGELO

Los Angeles

* We will never “wipe out” graffiti, not in a competitive, consumer society. The California Legislature has strengthened the law, but there is a problem that the Legislature cannot address: the home in which the vandals are raised.

One avenue worth exploring is “deferred garnishment.” If a vandal or his parents are unable to pay for the damage, then the bill is kept on record until such time as payment can be made, interest included. Homesteading and other rights are not lost, but credit is affected, as is title to property. Although this will not impress a 14-year-old bent on vandalism, this will provide restitution to victims without victims having to burden the court system with a new lawsuit. (A criminal action and a tort action will run concurrently on the same evidence, with the higher criminal threshold used for the tort action.) There is some chance that vandalism will be reduced because a vandal, having turned 18 and realizing the debt he now has to shoulder, will work off some of the debt by impressing on aspiring vandals his predicament.

MURAD MINASIAN

Montebello